I made a simple PAF spec page, with other pages. It can be found at:
http://nascent-project.org/digitxp/PAF%20Specs/PAFSpecs.html
You can download the whole thing at:
http://nascent-project.org/digitxp/PAFSpecs.zip
If there's anything wrong, just tell me.
This goes with my PAF Template, found at:
https://portableapps.com/node/12314
You are here
PAF Specs page [Unofficial]
March 26, 2008 - 8:37am
#1
PAF Specs page [Unofficial]
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Mastodon
Follow us on BlueSky
Good work, there's a few changes (mostly grammar/explanation) that I'll go through and make, then post them back for you
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
It's best not to have spaces in directory or file names, use an underscore, or dash instead.
And yea, this is looking good, I'll help you with it later, but call it UNOFFICIAL PAF Specs.
I've made quite a few changes already, and plan on making more, i'll upload the changes I've made so far.
Thanks digitxp for starting the work on this.
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
Here are my changes, I plan on continuing to edit these pages as well.
Thanks again digitxp for starting this work.
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
This is what was missing and could be useful.
A real information aimed at application developers instead of users will communicate Portable Apps much better.
These are unofficial and should be labeled as such on the page. The PortableApps.com logo should be removed since they are unofficial.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
Any chance the official pages are coming soon? maybe "next week"?
We're trying to help out and actually get some documentation up for this stuff, because there really isn't any that's together and organized, it's spread sporadically throughout the forums, and we have requests for detailed and accurate documentation over and over and over again.
If any of the info we have here is incorrect, please let us know and we'll fix it for you. Just trying to take a bit more of the load off your shoulders.
It was exactly 1 month ago that we were told the specs are finally done and that there would be a posting later that week. The week before that we were told that there was a delay because you had jury duty, but at least a rough draft would be released that week. We didn't see it, so we started working on our own. Hopefully the info included is accurate. digitxp did a good job getting things started on this, and i'm trying to clean up/organize/fix info. If you'd rather do it all yourself, let us know, and we'll just keep developing apps instead.
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
here, here!
I agree. Fullly. While I'm at it, what happened to that beta we were supposed to see?
Or the alpha that (I acknowledge), may or may not have been promised.
Too many lonely hearts in the real world
Too many bridges you can burn
Too many tables you can't turn
Don't wanna live my life in the real world
that's coming "next week" too...everything is "next week"
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
Reminds me of Annie....
"Tomorrow, you're always a day away..."
Cause apparently some large hardware vendors will be looking at the specs. But I still think we should do the best we can to inform unaware developers since they run around wondering what the heck the specifications actually are.
Understandable he wants to get every bit absolutely correct. And maybe these vendors are seeing the specs as we speak... I don't know.
All I know is it's not very cool to not see the stuff published as announced. Remember, I haven't been around for a very long time.
28 weeks ago I came to PortableApps.com
20 weeks ago I made my first Portable Application
19 weeks ago I asked a developer question
( https://portableapps.com/node/9904 )
And I got exited..
Maybe announcements could be done in terms of months, not days or weeks. And only name a time frame if you actually keep to the date. I actually stopped working on an app to wait the two weeks.
So the initiative of starting the platform specs is GREAT. I actually thought of doing one myself...
I'll do that ASAP.
Keep in mind that this would be for beginners, that don't even know what to do with an AppSource.txt.
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
it refuses to not use the logo I made (which looks like a tree branch).
But I changed it up to the point, at least.
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
Please edit the title of this topic to say "[Unofficial] PAF Specs"
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
Isn't that obvious? The official PAF Specs won't be posted on a forum page. Or on some unrelated URL... (an [Unofficial] assumption)...
Obvious to us yes, obvious to all users, maybe not. John asked that he change the topic title too.
The developer formerly known as ZGitRDun8705
got anything for me to fix???
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
I gave my feedback on the wiki entry which I know you already read (unless you skipped over my feedback when you edited the page).
http://cubegames.net/development/packaging
IMO: The directory structure should be converted to text format with the tag so people can visually figure out the structure better.
Cancer Survivors -- Remember the fight, celebrate the victory!
Help control the rugrat population -- have yourself spayed or neutered!
I added a link to a tree as a text file. But a PRE might work (the help file formatting doesn't make a box).
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
John,
Do you have any plans to set up a wiki on portableapps.com? There's a lot of useful information to be gleaned from many of the Dev Test posts that's just all over the place.
I've seen so many questions about the icon format, "what do you mean 32-bit?" etc, that it'd be great for the Testers to just tell newbies "go here to read more about the icon formats required".
While I was creating my first portableapp, I was trying to create a checklist. Stuff like that just feels right to belong to a wiki, as veteran packagers will probably have a really good checklist by now.
It'd also be great for a requests page. Say, the moderators will collect information from the Requests forum, and any apps that have a valid license, and are mature enough can be posted to one page where people will "adopt-an-app".
Specs, old PAF, new PAF, devtest PAF, beta PAF... it'd be great to have one go-to place for that information
/sylikc
I think John doesn't like wikis that much after what happened on Wikipedia...
It would have to be edited only by selected people, he doesn't want wrong info...
Insert original signature here with Greasemonkey Script.
A question begins to loom...
How do you guys find out the format to use for all those betas, tests and pre-releases? Copying the 'specs' from existing official releases obviously. But I don't understand why there still isn't a centralized page listing the do's and dont's.
I agree a wiki page may not be the correct solution, although I doubt vandalizing is its biggest problem. It's partly a problem of interpretation. Even information based on the official releases is not official. So currently (new) developers are forced to delve into NSIS scripts and try to figure it out themselves. While there is a page about compressing, etc. the 'specs' should be aimed at offering easy pointers to the PA format. At this time, everyone is just 'winging it' as they go.
Even an official specs page would offer more 'stability' for developers than none at all. Even if the specs would change every now and then.
I hope the coming specs page will be practical instead of a theoretical thing. Something that developers can use as reference. So what the specs change over time... it's the nature of the beast.